Comments on: Wool gets in the eyes

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 19:47:45 +0000

Doug,
You did miss one.
That’s the imminent default of the Greek economy, contagion across the eurozone that ensues, and heaven knows what after that. (World financial collapse?)

This however, is a real problem.

Hence we don’t talk about it.

By: Alexander K

Alexander K — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:19:09 +0000

Brilliant, mate. I will be chuckling all day. Or I would be if these idiot scenarios were not so costly and politicians weren’t so gullible.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:32:52 +0000

Speaking of lists, Omniclimate has a great (tongue in cheek ?) take on why CAGW is logically impossible

http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/why-agw-is-logically-impossible/

By: Flipper

Flipper — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:25:29 +0000

Doug Proctor – Excellent.

As youy say, you could extend the list almost without limit, back to shortges of various metals and even timber, through to that idiot Paul Erlich’s population “:bomb” predictions.

Richard T…. Dont worry about the Flat Earth Soiciety. The Pitt’s of this world are not worth the trouble.

I always wonder about people like “Dr Pitt.”
Wihout bothering to check what is probably a self-aggrandizing web site, it is obvious that Ph.Ds (in Hip Hop?) are now almost as prevalent as sardines.

By: Doug Proctor

Doug Proctor — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 20:44:43 +0000

In my lifetime I’ve been subjected to the following end-of-world scenarios:

1. 1955. Communism, Russian.
2. 1963. Nuclear war, with Russia. Actually almost happened.
3. 1968 Black-white race riots and Colour War in America, destroy USA, bring end to World Order.
3. 1970. Global cooling and coming ICE AGE, leading to
4. 1975. Global famine.
5. 1980. Nuclear war in the MidEast.
6. 1980. Communism, Chinese.
7. 1982. Nuclear war, with Russia.
8. 1979 – 1982. Great Depression Redux, bigger than the Great Depression of the 30s.
9. 1985. End of oil within 30 years.,
10. 1985. Failure of Californian (and other) food crops to keep up with population, limited famine.
11. 1985. Loss of Ozone, global blindness and crop failures.
12. 1990. End of fishing, fish all gone. Famine in 3rd world areas eating fish.
13. 1995. Communism, Chinese, or at least Chinese people infiltrating and running the West.
14. 2000. Y2K. Back to stoneage without a TV.
15. 2000 Global warming, famine, flooding, death of all species, the oceans.
16. 2011. Ocean acidification. Extinction of all marine species.

Somewhere there was also:

Forests all gone, including Amazon.
Run out of precious metals.
AIDS. Killing 1/3 of the world.
Birdflu Killing 40% of world.
Hantavirus. Killing lots and lots.
Birdflu again.
Swine flu.
Brain-softening Mad Cow Disease.
Anthrax spores in the postal system. Not to be confused with cyanide in the Aspirin.
Overpopulation, again, but somehow at the same time as famine and lack of fresh water: in death, people reproduce like zombie-rabbits, perhaps.
Drinkable water runs out. Still on the go.
Estrogen in the water supply.
DDT in mothers’ milk.
Tropical diseases sweeping the First world.
Flesh-eating diseases AND
Antibiotic immune bacteria.
Islam.
Garbage in the oceans.
Air pollution.
Acid rain.

I’m sure I’m missing some.

Do you get the idea that the last 55 years has been a delicate act of brinkmanship by all our eco-liberal pundits and professors? Thank the Lord they have steered us through so many almost-disasters. I just wish they would be full martyrs and PAY for the “fixes” also.

By: Alexander K

Alexander K — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:06:47 +0000

Dr Pitt, your web site is very interesting and full of fascinating stuff, but that does not make your statements re models in science sit all that comfortably with those of us who have been watching the forecasting models that certain cliques of climate scientists have invested their credibility in fail by a significant margin to match real-world data year after year after year. One of the clearest thinkers and writers on any science topic I have come across is Willis Eschenbach, who wrote a piece titled ‘Models All The Way Down’, which was posted on WUWT. I suggest you read this, if you have not already done so.
A current senior scientist at the UK Met office said not too long ago that data from observations in science were not terribly useful compared with models; his organisation is constantly ridiculed for it’s remarkably poor track record for forecasting weather further than one week out.
You may also have followed the controversy which followed the leaking of a tranche of emails from UEA in the UK. A number of individuals prominent in the UK and Edinborough Royal Societies were involved in various facets of the subsequent enquires and, in the of considered opinion of many observers, failed in their duty to the spirit of the scientific method and its princples.

By: Alexander K

Alexander K — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:43:52 +0000

Dr Pitt, you are obviously not familiar with either the New Zealand character or the reputations of the various Royal Societies. I do not pretend to be a scientist but I do read history. You should try it some time, but I suppose it’s quite difficult to see the pages from such a high horse.

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:22:16 +0000

Hopefully Tuppy will get a long rest in that big Maunder Minimum in the sky after all those busy solar cycles.

By: val majkus

val majkus — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:16:46 +0000

sorry about your cat Richard; I’m a cat lover myself and when I’m at my computer my cat (a young burmese) sits on the desk just in front of the keyboard
but losing a cat is hard; I always get another one asap cos I can’t live without one

By: Andy

Andy — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 07:47:18 +0000

All of science is based on models – empirical data on it’s own has absolutely no explanatory power

Yes I agree, reality is highly overrated, and doesn’t pull in the research grants.

Over to Richard Feynman…